AT&T’s weak 3G coverage map? There’s a lawsuit for that
Verizon has been drumming up press for it’s new DROID smartphone in commercials by showing a map of Verizon’s 3G coverage beside one of AT&T’s. Now AT&T has filed a lawsuit claiming that the map is misleading because it doesn’t include its 2G network coverage.
AT&T has been getting flack about dropped calls and congestion on its network ever since the launch of the original iPhone. At that time the company had barely any 3G coverage so the first iPhone was relegated to a 2G network connection.
In fact, that 2G connection still provides voice and data coverage for a large portion of AT&T customers outside of major cities. These customers don’t have access to the speedier 3G network connection that the iPhone is capable of using.
When Verizon showed the map of only AT&T’s 3G coverage, a large portion of the country is left blank. AT&T’s lawsuit says that Verizon is misleading customers into believing that they can’t get AT&T coverage in those blank areas at all.
Either that or AT&T is pissed that the Verizon commercial is tempting customers to jump ship to Verizon’s more reliable all-3G network. Of course, that wouldn’t make nearly as good a basis for a lawsuit.
What’s interesting is that the latest iPhone is billed as a 3G device even though a large portion of AT&T customers don’t live in one of the company’s 3G coverage area. Beyond that, AT&T’s map shows the company’s entire coverage area without marking the 3G areas differently at all.
AT&T customers have to look at a listing of individual cities where the company has 3G coverage. That must be what happens when the coverage areas are too few or too embarrassing to actually put on the map.
Instead of suing Verizon for pointing out it’s anemic 3G network, maybe AT&T should funnel money into expanding coverage into new cities. With less dropped calls and dead zones, AT&T customers might be more willing to recommend a friend.
Related Posts:
November 4th, 2009
Seriously. This is pure sour grapes from ATT at having been publicly called out for their poor coverage area. I suspect the lawsuit would get tossed as Verizon clearly labels the map “3G”, and it’s perfectly accurate.
From my BlackBerry Storm…
November 4th, 2009
Is it any wonder 3G wasn’t a priority for the first iPhone with that nonsense about it burning up battery juice too fast?
November 4th, 2009
“WEAK”, how about almost non existent. AT&T has the audacity to keep removing $60 per month from my bank account and in return I get NO service at all. I ahve tried their external modem for my laptop for over a year in many places with almost no signal available. And I call it it outright theft, but no lawyers seem interested. I wonder why.
Are they paying off a lawyer organization somewhere? Even my Blackberry Bold is apiece of crap as far as their service is concerned.
November 5th, 2009
@aquaadverse
The battery life issues really started when Apple released the push updates feature. Until then, the battery was just fine.
November 6th, 2009
Carmel, as long as people pay, AT&T has no incentive to improve their network.
November 6th, 2009
well they should lose the lawsuit because the two maps being compared were “3G” not 2G of both providers